Sociologist Žiliukaitė: now we only see the peaks of the social and economic consequences of the pandemic

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, possible changes in values ​​and attitudes, and the timing of the actual consequences of the coronavirus crisis, Delfi.lt spoke with sociologist, associate professor at Vilnius University Rūta Žiliukaitė.

– We have been living in a global coronavirus pandemic for almost a year. What impact does this have on society? Can we think that a pandemic affects people’s values ​​in one way or another?

– Looking at coronavirus research and analysis and data-driven data, it is clear that colleagues working in the securities field conclude that there is no data yet to suggest that this year’s experience would be very shocking or strange. values. And the values ​​are very important. Our core values ​​draw the lines of our lives.

When it comes to emergencies, values ​​always come into play when making decisions. We know from research on human behavior that values ​​change very rarely and are usually formed before adolescence, and the fundamentals remain fairly stable throughout life. That is not to say that they do not change, but they remain quite stable.

Of course, it is interesting to see if changes are taking place at the moment. Studies conducted in Western societies, comparing values ​​research data before the pandemic and as early as 2020, show that core values ​​- people’s religiosity, people’s political and ideological attitudes – do not change, scientists they do not notice changes in these areas.

But in addition to the values, there are also opinions of people that are very booming. There are provisions that may be related to certain political issues that are relevant in this COVID-19 situation, difficult issues that people are beginning to consider.

– What are those questions?

– One of those key issues is personal privacy. Research shows that attitudes toward personal privacy have changed. For one thing, there was more anxiety. Handling the pandemic has led to the collection of more personal information about people in many situations. Personal information is collected when, for example, when we go to a cafe, we have to say our phone number, first name, last name or applications that track a person’s movement are also personal data.

Privacy issues have become sensitive and the pandemic will certainly affect the way people think about their privacy. The pandemic raised the issue of privacy.

Another thing has to do with the theory of human needs, which says that as long as there are unsatisfied basic human needs (physical security, food, then it is very difficult for a person to achieve higher needs related to, for example, self-realization). Again, what the research data shows is that there is a certain shift from the values ​​of self-expression that emphasize democratic participation, democratic participation, to an undemocratic shift.

An undemocratic change in the sense that more people are emerging in society who say they need a strong leader who can handle the whole situation, or who say that what matters is not a democratic decision, but to hand over the decisions to experts who know and they can control everything. Western scientists, when analyzing how the situation caused by the coronavirus is changing, emphasize that there is such a shift towards undemocratic attitudes due to the lower security of the individual. How long this will stay is another question.

– These are some changes, but at the moment we cannot say that they are very serious or even substantial?

– In general, there is not a great impact on what people value in the family, what matters to them at work. But there certainly may be additional aspects that will be involved in security matters. The need for security has really increased and people appreciate it more.

Psychologists emphasize that there may be more threats to avoid. People will be less courageous in their choice in some situations due to the negative atmosphere that prevails during a pandemic, greater caution, and a greater need for security. However, research so far does not really show that the public value system is badly affected.

– Looking at the public space, it seems that the older and middle-aged generation in Lithuania had already experienced a great impact with the collapse of the Soviet Union, and this in one way or another affected their values ​​and self-determination. Could we think that the younger generation is experiencing a shock right now that will affect their values ​​and decisions?

– The younger generation is much more individualistic, much more independent. That situation, that insecurity could hardly intensify much in another direction.

On the one hand, we see that influencers and opinion leaders are able to mobilize people and there are certain fashion activities that need to be carried out. In other words, it’s clear who you need to be to look great and be very social. Among young people, we see such a wave, but it is only related to certain communities and activities. On the other hand, the question arises as to the extent to which people who are now involved in these social activities will continue to apply them beyond their own small community, of which they feel part and in which it is important for them to maintain that image.

Now we are all in this situation of limitations. During the Soviet era, a major shock to our older generation was a period when GDP was slipping and the living conditions of the vast majority of people were very difficult. What that period produced was that it produced great political and social alienation. If young people who have a more positive and optimistic mindset, but who have lost their job, have faced challenges while studying or in the family, or if they will be affected by it, or if they will be more politically and socially alienated, this question is open. But trust in institutions, social and political sentiment is certainly volatile. This is not necessarily a long-term phenomenon.

The first wave was lighter, you came to it from a life where there were more positive things, expectations of what will be tomorrow. In the current wave, economic sentiment and uncertainty are getting much worse. For example, if people had savings, many would have finished them.

Will a pandemic situation only bring us pride in having managed, overcome and been together? Yes, it will be. But there will also be completely undesirable social and political consequences that may be short-lived and we will get out along with economic growth. However, they can also be long-term, deepening problems in our society, such as a low level of solidarity, when people seem to want to help each other now, but that is more of a bubble. The investigation does not yet confirm that we have an increase in solidarity.

– In Lithuania, we often talk about the fact that social or political options are often determined by the evaluation of the Soviet past. You mentioned that new axes were emerging – privacy, democracy or anti-democracy – Could we think that it is these things that will lead to political and social decisions?

– As a scientist, I still cannot answer this question. But it would be very interesting to confirm such a hypothesis. At least hypothetically, this is certainly a serious question, can it be? Yes, it may or may not be.

– And when can we expect to see the real consequences of the changes brought about by the pandemic? Is it a matter of months or years?

– It’s definitely not a matter of months. Actually, we’ll look at all the trajectories over the course of four to five years, when it’s clear what the short-lived things were and what the clearest directions are. We really won’t see it anytime soon.

The question of the months is our state of mind in relation to what we like or do not like: if we like the Government and its actions, if we dislike them, if we like the president’s decisions, or do we not like them. It is the state of mind, but it is quite different to see more fundamental decisions about how family life is organized, what is expected of work, how the world of politics is understood in general, what place science occupies.

What really causes a pandemic to change are people’s attitudes towards science, which can be highly polarized. The pandemic has undoubtedly highlighted the importance of scientific inventions and innovation in tackling the health crisis. Science will also be important to fully manage socio-economic consequences, as we now only see the peaks of socio-economic consequences. And those consequences can certainly be much more.